I'm rather happy about my two latest articles on Gone Gaming: Winning Alternatives and Winning Alternatives 2.
Essentially, they propose radical shifts in the way we design our game goals to be more explicitly about our own self-mastery and less about beating our opponents. We have reached the civility to understand that our opponents are cooperating with us, providing the challenges we need to become stronger. Why not make that more explicit, and move away from the tired old duality of winners and losers? The use of the Internet, as a connection device, AI, and database of knowledge can help us to achieve this.
In other news, I'm getting tired of turning the army code into verse. There are almost 2,500 sections, 1,400 alone just in subtitle A (out of E). And I've only completed about 250 sections, plus some preliminary and explanatory verses. And it really is phenomenally boring, much more so than the IP codes. I think I'm going to settle for finishing parts I and II of subtitle A and be done with it (those contain some of the better parts, anyway). Maybe I'll come back to it again one day. What I've done so far was educational. In the meantime, I surely have better things to do.
Jonathan Degann has a nice article about games and artistry on his Journal of Board Game Design.
Raph points out a "YouTube for games", pjio.com. Looks cute.
And a board game design competition from the World Bank: they need a game about "Street Addressing", and you need $6000. (via David Bolton on BoardGameDesign).